Hannibal (2 Disc Special Edition) [2001] [DVD]

This is not only one of the best films I have ever soon but also a sequel to the original which certainly was awesome continuing the story of Hannibal. Anthony Hopkins was on point 100%. Totally recommend it and a bargin at the rental price. 👏 10/10 ☺️

Great movie

I love this film, because it was very very well made, and everything seem to fall into place without being on the edge of your seat or boring. It was perfect

Yes, ‘Silence of the Lambs’ was a classic. If you’re looking for deep, nasty performances (which cumulate with Anthony Hopkins even winning an Oscar) then Silence of the Lambs is for you. However, if you’re the majority who believe that Sir Hopkins makes a better Hannibal Lector than that other bloke in (technically the predecessor) ‘Red Dragon’ then you should get plenty of fun out of the – simply-titled – ‘Hannibal.’If you’re thinking of watching ‘Hannibal’ then it’s probably not too much of a spoiler to say that it starts out with the insane serial killer Hannibal ‘the cannibal’ Lector on the run and quietly evading the authorities. However, his life is about to take an inevitable turn for the dramatic when his paths cross former (how should I describe her – friend? Colleague? Inquisitor?) Clarice Starling (only played by Julianne Moore rather than Jodie Foster). Therefore, our favourite human-eater is forced out of retirement to cause more mayhem.So, ‘Hannibal,’ like so many sequels, doesn’t really live up to the original. However, that’s not for the want to trying. It has many things going for it. Obviously, Anthony Hopkins is one of them (and the main one to be sure). He’s as creepy and chilling as ever and, now that he’s on the loose, it makes you wonder if anyone is really safe. You also have Ridley Scott behind the camera providing excellent shot composition, atmosphere and performances. And, don’t believe everything you hear about recasting Foster with Moore. I’m not saying against Foster, but – in my humble opinion – Moore is actually a better Agent Starling than Foster. Then, to cap it all, you have an – almost unrecognisable – Gary Oldman as a completely insane former victim of Lector, now hell-bent on revenge.So, take all four of those plus points on any other movie and you’d probably get guaranteed of an instant classic. Sadly, not so here. ‘Hannibal’ was met with indifference from many, including die-hard fans of Silence of the Lambs. I like ‘Hannibal,’ but I can see where they’re coming from. This film does tend to simply lack direction. It’s like there are so many good pieces to its puzzle, yet they’re never really lined out in any particular order to link them seamlessly together. In short, ‘Hannibal’ is all over the place.Yet, despite this, I enjoy it for what it is and regularly watch it. As long as you’re not expecting anything quite as ‘fluid’ as Silence of the Lambs and are fans of any or all of the central actors/directors then there’s definitely something here to be enjoyed.Just don’t look too deeply at the fog. It’s everywhere. It’s like a ‘dry ice’ machine was left running on every exterior scene at night. Weird.

Slow to get going

This may be a sequel to The Silence of the Lambs but it's a different animal to its illustrious predecessor - choosing to try and take us on a different journey which is reasonably successful for the most part.Anthony Hopkins is back of course and on fine form. Jodie Foster is absent which is bad but instead we get Julianne Moore which is good. This time out, Ridley Scott is on board also which is even better. Leaning away from the other serial killer types, this time the film is more about Hannibal himself and his own murderous intentions (the clues in the title). He's essentially on the run of course and is being pursued by the authorities (obviously) but also by an old enemy - played here by Gary Oldman in a typically eccentric turn. Meanwhile the Clarice/Hannibal relationship is explored and developed to a certain extent.Scott shoots it all with a fair amount of style, the performances are first rate and it all builds up nicely and tensely over the generous running time. It's a shame that the quality, menacing but understated build up gives way in the final reel to events that are altogether more ridiculous. I thought it was never less than entertaining though and certainly worth a watch at least. For my money though (like anyone cares) Manhunter is still the best Hannibal Lecter film out there. Just saying.

Not as good as the book but a good film

Sucker for these Hannibal movies as I am, it was good sense to allow him freedom after Red Dragon and Silence of the Lambs where he was in jail; enough was enough and it had to happen to keep the interest alive. And it works very well, but having said that, as mentioned in my Basic Instinct 2 review, one of my fellow reviewer's would not, perhaps, agree. That he bombed BI2 in that Catherine Tramell wasn't under police surveillance and hence got away with the murders, (or was it Dr Michael Glass?), seemed to irk him, yet here, we have much the same conundrum if you take that reviewer's complaints into consideration. Hannibal is one of America's ten most wanted, so how does he fly from Florence to America after Clarice Starling, then fly away again to end the movie? Were custom's and immigration lax, or just plainly asleep? Well, it's called poetic licence, and these things are allowed to drift from reality in a story/film otherwise it would just grind to a halt. Hannibal managed it somehow, much like Catherine Tramell/Dr Michael Glass in BI2, and it HAS TO happen. But this is excellent as the last (?) in the trilogy. Whether Thomas Harris is content to leave the story there, and if he didn't and wrote a fourth, would Anthony Hopkins come out from retirement (again) to play the part, we don't know? We can only guess and maybe hope?